FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1520790042> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1520790042 startingPage "1743" @default.
• W1520790042 abstract "INTRODUCTION It has long been established that legislatures can pass laws that limit a person's rights based on past criminal convictions. (1) In Hawker v. People of New York, (2) the United States Supreme Court held that there was no ex post facto problem when a state statute prohibited the practice of medicine by a person with a past conviction, even though this was not contemplated at the time of the conviction. In subsequent cases, the Court has made clear that other after-the-fact consequences, including mandatory deportation, present no ex post facto problem. (3) Although there are arguments that due process might nonetheless curb extreme uses of this legislative power, the constitutional landscape for litigation is constrained. (4) At the same time, statutory arguments against retroactive application of consequences of criminal convictions have become more robust. Despite the fact that immigration consequences are widely treated as collateral to a conviction, (5) the Supreme Court's 2001 decision in I.N.S. v. St. Cyr (6) recognized that changes in the immigration consequences of a conviction can constitute a new legal consequence that cannot be imposed retroactively without clear congressional intent. (7) St. Cyr represents a major potential tool in protecting the rights of persons convicted of crimes from onerous civil consequences. St. Cyr leaves open many issues that will determine how powerful the decision will actually prove to be in practice. One of those issues is the core question of the date against which legal consequences are measured. (8) Although it is well established in criminal law that retroactive effect is measured from the date of criminal conduct, (9) many courts have drawn a very different lesson from the Supreme Court's decision in St. Cyr. These courts have concluded that, for a law to have a retroactive effect on those with past convictions, the conviction must arise from a plea, and the plea agreement must have predated the change in the laws. (10) This rule has led to many anomalous results, such as permitting civil consequences based on past convictions for those who took their cases to trial years before a change in the law. (11) This Article traces the roots of the current emphasis on plea Agreements (12) to confusion about indicia of retroactivity in cases involving quasi-economic transactions (13) and those involving laws that are targeted at wrongful conduct. (14) Although economic transactions are properly evaluated in terms of standards such as reliance, reliance has no proper application with respect to laws that govern wrongful conduct. Instead, when wrongful conduct is at issue, the proper question is whether the person had fair notice of the degree of consequences. I. THE ROOTS OF A PLEA-BASED STANDARD OF RETROACTIVITY At the heart of retroactivity case law is the question whether a law has a retroactive effect. (15) Without a retroactive effect, the law does not trigger any special form of scrutiny under either statutory or constitutional principles. (16) If there is a retroactive effect, however, the law will not be read as applying in a retroactive manner absent a clear expression of legislative intent to apply the law in that manner. (17) In addition, only a retroactive effect will trigger per se bar imposed by the Ex Post Facto Clause or require seperate justification under the Due Process Clause. (18) Recent case law developments exploring the retroactive effect of changes in the immigration consequences of convictions began by asking the question whether a collateral consequence, such as being excluded from relief from deportation, could also be considered a legal of any past criminal act. (19) In a series of cases decided after the 1990 revisions to the immigration laws, many courts concluded that there was no retroactive effect from laws that eliminated the right to a discretionary relief hearing prior to deportation. …" @default.
• W1520790042 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1520790042 creator A5040515118 @default.
• W1520790042 date "2003-07-01" @default.
• W1520790042 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W1520790042 title "Determining the Retroactive Effect of Laws Altering the Consequences of Criminal Convictions" @default.
• W1520790042 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
• W1520790042 type Work @default.
• W1520790042 sameAs 1520790042 @default.
• W1520790042 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1520790042 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1520790042 hasAuthorship W1520790042A5040515118 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C114104786 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C158129432 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C17319257 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C2777278149 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C2909129154 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C60961049 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C70036468 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConcept C83009810 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C114104786 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C144024400 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C158129432 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C17319257 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C17744445 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C199539241 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C2777278149 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C2778272461 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C2909129154 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C60961049 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C70036468 @default.
• W1520790042 hasConceptScore W1520790042C83009810 @default.
• W1520790042 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W1520790042 hasLocation W15207900421 @default.
• W1520790042 hasOpenAccess W1520790042 @default.
• W1520790042 hasPrimaryLocation W15207900421 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W1485548608 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W1510749584 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W1511575775 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W1564762915 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W2052851557 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W2133325451 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W2167022112 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W2248313797 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W2272335211 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W2291293414 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W243195079 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W257474092 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W3121538483 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W3122213241 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W3138311255 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W381629318 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W87548614 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W897555641 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W1700390301 @default.
• W1520790042 hasRelatedWork W1886355341 @default.
• W1520790042 hasVolume "30" @default.
• W1520790042 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1520790042 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1520790042 magId "1520790042" @default.
• W1520790042 workType "article" @default.